Proof of Paternity without DNA Evidence

That the decedent was named as the father of the claimant on her birth certificate, together with testimony that the decedent “held out” the claimant as his daughter by allowing her to reside with him when she was a child, and again for two or three years while she was in high school, that he provided support for her, and that he signed guardianship papers to allow the claimant to live with her aunt, is clear and convincing evidence that the claimant is the child of the decedent under 20 Pa.C.S. § 2107(c)(2) and an intestate heir. Estate of David W. Ackley, Sr., 11 Fid.Rep.3d 35 (Monroe O.C. 2020).

[For a previous opinion denying the administrator’s request that the claimant be required to take a DNA test, see  Ackley, Sr. Estate, 10 Fid.Rep.3d 253, 55 Monroe, No. 41, P. 10 (Monroe O.C. 2020).]

Enforcing Structured Settlement for Minor

Under the Pa. Structured Settlement Protection Act, 40 P.S. §§ 4001-4009, courts are required to supervise all aspects of settlements in which a minor is a party in interest, and an assignment of annuities issued as part of a structured settlement requires the approval of the court that approved the structured settlement. An order by the Orphans’ Court that approved the structured settlement for a minor to consolidate actions in other counties regarding the assignment of annuities issued as part of the settlement, and directing that all annuity payments be made to the court pending a determination of the validity of the assignments, was not an an injunction and was neither a final appealable order nor an appealable order regarding an injunction. Barber v. Stanko, 2021 PA Super 97 (5/14/2021), quashing appeal of, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 11 (Allegheny O.C. 2021).

Award from 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund Not Payable to Spouse

An award from the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund was not payable to the surviving spouse, despite the language of 20 Pa.C.S. § 2102(2), because it was not payable under the act specified in that section, the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act, but under a later, different act. In Re: Estate of Richard A. Chennisi, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 22 (Chester O.C. 2021), reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded, 2022 PA Super 31, ___ A.3d ___ (2/18/2022).

Compensation of Administrator and Attorney Reduced by Half

The compensation of a lawyer who served as administrator of the estate, submitted a fee agreement to beneficiaries specifying compensation at an hourly rate, and kept hourly time records with specific descriptions of work was nevertheless reduced by more than half, from $11,165.65 to $5,165.65, when the amount originally billed was almost 75% of the estate and the estate was not complicated. Andrews Estate, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 15 (Monroe O.C. 2020).

Continuing Jurisdiction over Minor’s Personal Injury Settlement

The court that approved the original settlement of the litigation for a minor’s injuries had jurisdiction to issue an order under Pa.R.C.P. 213.1 to consolidate actions in other counties approving the sale of annuities held for the benefit of the minor, and it was not improper to order future annuity payments to be paid into court pending a proper adjudication of the issues. Barber v. Stanko, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 11 (Allegheny O.C. 2021), appeals quashed, 2021 PA Super 97 (5/14/2021).

Gift of Entire Estate Was “Substantial Benefit”

Partial summary judgment was granted on the “substantial benefit” element of undue influence when the contested will left the entire estate to the proponent of the will (who was also the mother’s caretaker) despite the proponent’s claim that the additional funds were for her children’s educations. Gattegno Estate, 11 Fid.Rep.3d 2 (Allegheny O.C. 2021).

PBA Opposes Proposed Pa.O.C. Rule 10.7 on Digital Assets

Posted on by December 4, 2022

At the recommendation of the Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Section of the Pennsylvania Bar Association, the PBA Board of Governors has voted to oppose the adoption of Pa.O.C. Rule 10.7 that had been proposed by the Supreme Court Orphans’ Court Procedural Rules Committee for procedures before the Register of Wills under the Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act and to support instead the adoption of a different Rule 10.7 proposed by the Section. “Recommendation and Report on The Proposal by the Orphans’ Court Procedural Rules Commmittee of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania regarding New Rule 10.7 concerning Section 3908 of Pennsylvania’s Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act (‘RUFADAA’), 20 Pa.C.S. Section 3908.”